Renormalization Group Invariants in the MSSM and Its Extensions

We derive one-loop renormalization group (RG) invariant observables and analyze their phenomenological implications in the MSSM and its \mu problem solving extensions, U(1)' model and NMSSM. We show that there exist several RG invariants in the gauge, Yukawa and soft-breaking sectors of each model. In general, RG invariants are highly useful for projecting experimental data to messenger scale, for revealing correlations among the model parameters, and for probing the mechanism that breaks supersymmetry. The Yukawa couplings and trilinear soft terms in U(1)' model and NMSSM do not form RG invariants though there exist approximate invariants in low tan(beta). In the NMSSM, there are no invariants that contain the Higgs mass-squareds. We provide a comparative analysis of RG invariants in all three models and analyze their model-building and phenomenological implications by a number of case studies.Comment: 32 pages, 5 tables; extended previous analysis to include U(1)' models and NMSSM where a comparative discussion is give

Higher Order Unification via Explicit Substitutions

AbstractHigher order unification is equational unification for βη-conversion. But it is not first order equational unification, as substitution has to avoid capture. Thus, the methods for equational unification (such as narrowing) built upon grafting (i.e., substitution without renaming) cannot be used for higher order unification, which needs specific algorithms. Our goal in this paper is to reduce higher order unification to first order equational unification in a suitable theory. This is achieved by replacing substitution by grafting, but this replacement is not straightforward as it raises two major problems. First, some unification problems have solutions with grafting but no solution with substitution. Then equational unification algorithms rest upon the fact that grafting and reduction commute. But grafting and βη-reduction do not commute in λ-calculus and reducing an equation may change the set of its solutions. This difficulty comes from the interaction between the substitutions initiated by βη-reduction and the ones initiated by the unification process. Two kinds of variables are involved: those of βη-conversion and those of unification. So, we need to set up a calculus which distinguishes between these two kinds of variables and such that reduction and grafting commute. For this purpose, the application of a substitution of a reduction variable to a unification one must be delayed until this variable is instantiated. Such a separation and delay are provided by a calculus of explicit substitutions. Unification in such a calculus can be performed by well-known algorithms such as narrowing, but we present a specialised algorithm for greater efficiency. At last we show how to relate unification in λ-calculus and in a calculus with explicit substitutions. Thus, we come up with a new higher order unification algorithm which eliminates some burdens of the previous algorithms, in particular the functional handling of scopes. Huet's algorithm can be seen as a specific strategy for our algorithm, since each of its steps can be decomposed into elementary ones, leading to a more atomic description of the unification process. Also, solved forms in λ-calculus can easily be computed from solved forms in λσ-calculus

lim+, delta+, and Non-Permutability of beta-Steps

Using a human-oriented formal example proof of the (lim+) theorem, i.e. that the sum of limits is the limit of the sum, which is of value for reference on its own, we exhibit a non-permutability of beta-steps and delta+-steps (according to Smullyan's classification), which is not visible with non-liberalized delta-rules and not serious with further liberalized delta-rules, such as the delta++-rule. Besides a careful presentation of the search for a proof of (lim+) with several pedagogical intentions, the main subject is to explain why the order of beta-steps plays such a practically important role in some calculi.Comment: ii + 36 page

Levels of Reality as Source of Quantum Indeterminacy

We show that the notion of "levels of Reality" introduced by Werner Heisenberg in his "Manuscript of 1942" (1984) and by myself (1983-1985) could explain the quantum indeterminacy. General epistemological implications of this notion are also studied.Comment: 18 page

Abstractions in Logic Programs

Most logic programming languages have the first-order, classical theory of Horn clauses as their logical foundation. Purely proof-theoretical considerations show that Horn clauses are not rich enough to naturally provide the abstraction mechanisms that are common in most modern, general purpose programming languages. For example, Horn clauses do not incorporate the important software abstraction mechanisms of modules, data type abstractions, and higher-order programming. As a result of this lack, implementers of logic programming languages based on Horn clauses generally add several nonlogical primitives on top of Horn clauses to provide these missing abstraction mechanisms. Although the missing features are often captured in this fashion, formal semantics of the resulting languages are often lacking or are very complex. Another approach to providing these missing features is to enrich the underlying logical foundation of logic programming. This latter approach to providing logic programs with these missing abstraction mechanisms is taken in this paper. The enrichments we will consider have simple and direct operational and proof theoretical semantics